Legal Opinion · Dissent

Dave's Place, Inc. v. Liquor Control Comm.

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided June 9, 1936No. Calendar 38,995Published

1DissentNorth, C. J.

Plaintiff corporation seeks a peremptory writ of mandamus to compel the liquor control commission of this State to issue to plaintiff two beer licenses.

I think the writ should be denied for the following reasons:

The Constitution of this State invested the legislature with power to establish a liquor control commission, “who, subject to statutory limitations, shall exercise complete control of the alcoholic beverage traffic within this State.” The liquor control act (Act No. 8, Pub. Acts 1933 [Ex. Sess.]) contains the following provisions:

“Sec. 17. The commission is hereby authorized to issue…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Toan v. McGinnMichigan Supreme Court · 1935
  2. Scott v. Arcada Township BoardMichigan Supreme Court · 1934
  3. Johnson v. Liquor Control CommissionMichigan Supreme Court · 1934
  4. Simonton v. City of PontiacMichigan Supreme Court · 1934
  5. Detroit Bar Ass'n v. American Life InsuranceMichigan Supreme Court · 1933

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API